As special counsel Robert Mueller builds his case, relatives of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn are among those pressing the president to use his unique legal power and ‘put these defendants out of their misery.’

Secretary of State for Exiting the EU David Davis takes a trip along the River Tees after he delivered a speech during a visit to PD Ports at Teesport on January 26, 2018 in Teesside, England | Ian Forsyth/Getty Images

David Davis demands UK say on EU rules during Brexit transition

The Brexit secretary set out the UK’s negotiating position on a transition deal in a major speech Friday.

MIDDLESBROUGH, England — The U.K. has conceded a lot to get the transition deal it sorely needs, but it has not given up asking for something in return — a voice at the EU table.

In a key speech on the British government’s vision for a transition period, Brexit Secretary David Davis said his negotiators would be seeking “a way of resolving concerns” if the EU were to change its rules to the detriment of the U.K. during the transition. During that period the U.K. — having ceded its seat at the European Council, its MEPs and its role in the Commission — will have no formal way to influence the EU legislation it will remain subject to.

While admitting that time is of the essence in agreeing a transition — both sides ideally want it sorted by the European Council summit in late March — Davis knows that he has little leverage over the EU27. The U.K. needs a transition deal more than they do — a fact underlined by an open letter signed by Davis and two other Cabinet ministers that is designed to reassure businesses who are increasingly worried about a lack of regulatory and legal certainty post Brexit.

“This will be a relationship where respect flows both ways” — Brexit Secretary David Davis

And in any case, delivering what Davis wants will require some imaginative thinking. No such mechanism currently exists. Nor is it signaled in any of the leaked draft versions of the EU’s negotiating directives for the transition talks — a fact that has not gone unnoticed by the U.K., and was a significant factor behind their decision to set out the request ahead of those directives being finalized by the EU27 on Monday, individuals familiar with the matter said.

“This will be a relationship where respect flows both ways,” Davis said, speaking to an audience of business leaders summoned to a port warehouse in the northast town of Middlesbrough on Friday. “And it’s in that spirit we should approach the implementation period as the bridge to this new relationship,” he added.

Insurance policy

The dispute resolution mechanism imagined by Davis is one aspect of what looks like a three-tiered insurance policy by which the U.K. wants to protect itself against any EU rule changes that might harm its interests during the transition. What these might be is not explicit. Any alteration to financial services regulation that harms the City of London features heavily in British nightmares, however.

The first tier of the policy is trust. Davis called for an agreement that included “each side committing to not taking any action that undermines the other.” How enforceable such a commitment would be is debatable.

The second is practical reality. “It usually takes around two full years for major legislation to make its way through the EU system into law,” Davis said. So anything coming into effect during the transition, the U.K. would have a say in anyway.

It’s the third and final tier of the insurance policy that could be complicated. Notwithstanding the two previous guarantees, Davis said, “we will have to agree a way of resolving concerns if laws are deemed to run contrary to our interests and we have not had our say, and we will agree an appropriate process for this temporary period.”

To Brussels ears, highly attuned to the gentle rustle of cherries being picked, that might sound suspicious. For the EU27, not being in the EU means losing your say. Just ask Norway.

Much will depend on the detail of what the U.K. asks for — something Davis left unspecified. If it looks too much like membership, they can probably go whistle. But having agreed to accept all EU rules, and by continuing to pay their financial obligations to the EU, the U.K.’s negotiators may have bought a degree of goodwill to achieve something more limited. Time will tell.

Playing to the gallery

In truth, Davis’ pitch was as much aimed at a domestic audience as it was at Brussels.

It was only on Wednesday that he endured a needling inquisition about the transition period from Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg at the House of Commons’ exiting the EU committee.

Rees-Mogg, who has quickly emerged as the government’s most dangerous backbench scrutinizer, challenged Davis to explain how — by abiding by the rules, remaining under European Court of Justice jurisdiction and paying into the EU budget, all without any say in governance — the U.K. would be anything other than a “vassal state” for two years or more. Davis said at the same committee hearing that the transition would last “between 21 and 27 months.”

“Vassal state” — or “mini me” to the EU, as Rees-Mogg described it in a Thursday speech — is dangerous language for Davis and Prime Minister Theresa May, whose political authority over restless Brexiteers in their party rests on the idea that Brexit must mean British regulatory, legal and political autonomy.

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg | Oli Scarff/AFP via Getty Images

It was no surprise then that Davis made clear he also wanted to secure as much independence during the transition as he can. The Brexit secretary called for the U.K. to be able to negotiate and even sign its own free-trade deals with non-EU countries during the transition (although not to implement them).

Davis also reiterated the government’s plan to introduce a registration system for EU citizens coming to live in the U.K. during transition — allowing the government to point to a change in the immigration system that otherwise will mean freedom of movement continuing in all but name for that period. “It will have no bearing on people’s ability to work or visit,” Davis made clear. That too will struggle to win favor among backbench Brexiteers.

Many in government hoped a transition deal would be easy for the U.K. to push through, both domestically and in Brussels. The more we learn about it, the less likely that appears.

Milton38

All this talk only shows one thing, the consequences of leaving the EU were not considered and thought through.
This, however, dear politicians is exactly what you get paid for. You are thus incompetent and should be fired or demoted.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 4:46 AM CET

Helmut J

Seems reasonable for the UK to have a say if the UK are still contributing.
If the UK has no say then it would make common sense for the UK’s contributions to be in line with other states that have no say, a fraction of what the UK currently pays.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 7:23 AM CET

Peter G

Posted on 1/27/18 | 7:53 AM CET

tpk

A phrase that UK gets consulted about new laws is reasonable, but a legal power to stop it would be too much leverage.
I wonder if Brexiteers will try to fight transition or if they have given in already. Since the idea came up in September it was obvious that these would be the conditions.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:20 AM CET

Brandon

@Milton38
“All this talk only shows one thing, the consequences of leaving the EU were not considered and thought through. You are thus incompetent and should be fired or demoted.”

Yes, and using your logic we can also see that the EU did NOT foresee brexit and they still unable to foresee the British demands. These EU fellas should also be sacked or demoted.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:21 AM CET

tpk

@Helmut
Like which countries? Norway pays more per capita (right word?, per person) than you do.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:24 AM CET

Kenny

@tpk

You lot continue to forget that the UK leaves the EU on 29th March 2019.
During (and after) an ‘implementation period’ the UK will be OUTSIDE the EU.
It cannot be stopped, no one will retract art50.
Your treasure island has gone.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:26 AM CET

HelmutJ

For the period 2014 – 2021, Norway’s annual contribution will be around 391 million euro.
If the UK takes the Norway deal then the contributions should be the same. = Peanuts.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:30 AM CET

tpk

@Kenny

Read the article?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:31 AM CET

HelmutJ

@tpk

And Canada pays absolutely nothing…

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:32 AM CET

Just Once

@Helmut J

“Seems reasonable for the UK to have a say if the UK are still contributing.
If the UK has no say then it would make common sense for the UK’s contributions to be in line with other states that have no say, a fraction of what the UK currently pays”

As a EU citizen, I wouldn’t be happy if the decisions are made by a country whose interest lay outside the bloc. It is fair if UK doesn’t have a say but has the right to negotiate new deals with other courtiers. And paying the agreed commitments is not linked to the level of “say” a country should have when leaving.
Rules should be formed and applied to everyone as usual. EU doesn’t need to slow down and wait for UK’s transitional period with unspecified duration to be finished before it moves on.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:34 AM CET

HelmutJ

@tpk
“Read the article”

Yes, then I did a little research of my own.
I googled it and read various sources to reach my own unbiased opinion.
Did you google it?… Or did you just accept something written that pleases you ?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:35 AM CET

HelmutJ

@Just Once

You cannot expect a country to pay full contributions for less?
Maybe for less the UK should pay less (just like everyone else) ?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:37 AM CET

tpk

According to Times May canceled a speech planned next month in which she wanted to present UKs Brexit position. To avoid rifts in Cabinet.
On one hand Brexiteers seem running out of arguments on how to do it but that has zero impact on the general opinion. Still basically 50:50. I wonder how UK will be able to move here. For one half is backed by the won referendum, whereas nearly whole of economy puts its weight into the other half.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:41 AM CET

HelmutJ

@Just Once

As an EU citizen I am perplexed by the attitude of most EU posters on this site.
I’m not pro or anti anything.
But it doesn’t seem right that a major contributor pays the same while losing the right to have a say. If one has that right then one may pay more for it, but if that right is taken away then any contribution should reflect this… I would say the same if Germany or any other country were leaving.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:42 AM CET

HelmutJ

@tpk

So? What is your point ? Didn’t Juncker just cancel a trip?
Doesn’t every politician adjust their diaries and commitments according the needs and priorities? The future is not written in stone.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:46 AM CET

G127

The UK hasn’t payed full membership fees since Thatcher: they got a discount. Norway pays less than full membership: but they don’t get a discount. That’s why continued membership of the internal market seems to be so expensive, I think.

Maybe bith would be better off (without bitter ‘vassal-state’ feelings without a transition.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:46 AM CET

tpk

@HelmutJ

Canada is by far not good enough, remember? That’s why it is free. I googled 740 million for 5million people in Norway. That is somewhat less than UK but there should be also less involved. Norway would also be cheaper for you. But you ASKED for transition, not Norway.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:55 AM CET

jhk

Latest Brexit policy: I want out of the EU while staying in the EU.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:58 AM CET

Helmut?

@G127

I wasn’t old enough to understand that but it seems that the UK was being asked to pay a large contribution into an inefficient agricultural policy from which it did not benefit. Since the main beneficiaries being Germany and France it is reasonable to say that Germany and France were already receiving a ‘rebate’ in the form of payments to their farmers whilst the UK got nothing. Apparently, the UK’s rebate simply put the UK’s contribution onto the same level as Germany and France.
Seems reasonable for the UK to refuse to subsidise German and French farmers.
I could be wrong but I don’t remember Germany or France subsidising UK steel ?

Again, its once again easy to google it and see the real facts and why the rebate was fair.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:02 AM CET

Helmut?

@tpk

Odd logic, you say that if someone asks then they must pay more ?
That’s just more of the clouded thinking that pervades this website.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:06 AM CET

Helmut?

G127

My reply didn’t appear.
But for an unbiased explanation of the UK rebate you can google it.
British contributions subsidised German and French farmers.
Germany and France where getting a rebate in the form of payments to German and French farmers while the UK got nothing. I don’t remember Germany or France subsidising British steel ?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:09 AM CET

HelmutJ

@tpk
“But you ASKED for transition”

I didn’t ask for anything, I’m an EU citizen living in the UK where I will remain whether it stays in the EU or not.
But you think that someone who asks for something gives you an excuse to ask for more?
Odd and very clouded thinking.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:15 AM CET

Anton

@HelmutJ
The UK wouldn’t be paying a cent/penny more for the transition period. The financial settlement includes the 7 year budget running until December 31st. 2020. In a way you could say they are getting for their money than they initially bargained for.

As for giving them a say in future politics, that would serverly undermine the democratic process of the EU. If we grant the UK some kind of veto over rules or say over rules apart from the democratic influence everybody else has, then we’re are giving them an undemocratic influence.

As for FTAs, what if the UK decides to allow chlorinated chicken, hormone beef for phthalate filled plastics into the UK. During the transition period, there would be no way to stop them from entering the EU.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:19 AM CET

tpk

@HelmutJ

UK asks for the everything to stay same. Same access for goods and services, same services included, same everything, just not involved in policiy making anymore. And by that cause huge upheaval and costs. If I was UK I would not think for one second for asking for a rebate. And I am quite sure they do not themselves.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:23 AM CET

Milton38

@Brandon
Did I explicitly mention the UK or clearly exclude the EU?
No, then why your comment. Did you not understand what I wrote?
And, by the way, nobody in the UK, not even the instigators and propagandists of Brexit did foresee the result of the vote; it is thus rather far-fetched to ascertain that the rest of the EU should have foreseen this. The EU now sits with a fait accompli and must look after its interests; not that of a country that decided to leave. I know that is difficult to understand but it is the UK who now has to try and find the best acceptable, to the EU, solution.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:25 AM CET

tpk

@HelmutJ

Times say explicitly that May did not dare to hold the speech.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:26 AM CET

HelmutJ

@Priscilla du Bleu

Canada does not obey EU regs, Canada does not recognize 4 freedoms, Canada does not contribute, Canada does not recognize ECJ.

Someone who agrees to the above must pay ?
Your comment holds no water.

Time for me to leave for work.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:31 AM CET

HelmutJ

@tpk
“Times say explicitly that May did not dare to hold the speech.”

Of course they did, they say many things, as do many other tabloids.
They have a paper to sell.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:35 AM CET

Ian

tpk ,
You and Barnier for the EU have repeatedly said that the UK has to accept the Norway deal , WTO, or the Canada deal .

The UK will not accept the Norway deal

If the UK is transitioning to a Canada deal , then all contributions should stop , as Canada does not pay membership fees etc .
ECJ superiority over UK law also stops , and The UK should not have to accept any new laws introduced during the transitional period , whilst it has no say in the European Parliament .

Not paying membership fees etc , and not having any say in the EP , would then probably be acceptable .

If as PDB states , that the UK will be an ex member during the transition period , with no say etc , then it should not pay membership fees , as it is no longer a member

By stating that the UK must pay membership fees , without any say , and must continue to accept ECJ superiority over UK law , and still not have any say in EU migration to the UK etc , would of course be The EU having its cake and eat it scenario .

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:36 AM CET

just an EU guy

And it has been reported that UK is seeking a longer transition period… 🙂

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:37 AM CET

HelmutJ

@tpk

Speculation and sensationalism, what Trump calls fake news.
The “Times” did not claim that May said so. – Its an opinion, nothing more.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:38 AM CET

HelmutJ

@just an EU guy

I saw that too, is it real news or fake news, does it matter, and what relevance is it ?
Is it just smoke that clouds your vision ?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:41 AM CET

tpk

@HelmutJ

Without any offense. I suppose you are German but a lot of Englishness seems to have overcome you already 🙂 This asking for rebates, this sensitiveness of the English about the money going from UK to EU feels a bit odd from my perspective. The very impulse of Brexiteers is to break free from EU and by that make tons on money. That feels like a great, brave enterpreneur who will make his way, no matter what.

But at the same time many Brexiteers here keep whining about money and other goodies UK should just get for free or even on the expense of EU. And that is not demanded with the attitude of a great enterpreneur, but with the sound reminding me of a spoiled child that feels betrayed by his father for not buying him the newest iPhone (because his is alreday 7 months old and does not have the newest features).

Again, I don’t want to attack, this is just a basic impression I get. I am missing the enterpreneurs energy and I wonder about this complaining energy. A real enterpreneur would say: sodd the 10bn, let’s put all our energy into making this happen. But like this it’s a wild mixture and I wonder if this spoiled child attitute is the right one for an undertaking like Brexit.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:49 AM CET

Elena adaal

The transition deal the UK gets cannot be better that the one Norway has. Norway would – rightly be unhappy; thinking that the EU would be unfair to them. Norway plays by the rules, pays in and accepts the four freedoms. They do not have a a say in EU rules. It would be very strange if the UK got more, while the UK is leaving.

Also, the UK is on its way out of the door, and they should not have any control over EU rules and regulations anymore.

Take it or leave it.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:49 AM CET

Just Once

@HelmutJ

“You cannot expect a country to pay full contributions for less?
Maybe for less the UK should pay less (just like everyone else) ”

The payment I’m talking about is for the agreed current financial commitments made by UK.
I do not wish UK to pay more than what is fair.
Once the budget cycle is finished, I agree, UK should negotiate new contribution, reflecting the level of participation.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:51 AM CET

Ian

Milton38 ,
“And, by the way, nobody in the UK, not even the instigators and propagandists of Brexit did foresee the result of the vote; it is thus rather far-fetched to ascertain that the rest of the EU should have foreseen this”

David Cameron warned the EU that The UK could vote to leave when he went to Brussels asking for concessions before the referendum

The fact The EU did not take notice , and were so arrogant in believing that nobody would vote to leave is their failing .

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:51 AM CET

Boyan Taksirov

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:55 AM CET

Just an EU guy

@HelmutJ
you guess is as good as mine.

19 months is probably too short for a proper transition. Economically it makes sense for UK to secure an extension or the possibility of an extension. Politically , it is dynamite.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:03 AM CET

tpk

@Just an EU guy

There is a joke amongst programmers of how to calculate the time needed for a project: Ask the programmer how long he thinks that he will need. Then multiply it with 2 and take the next unit (Einheit in German?).

So if the programmer estimates 10 hours, that would be 20hours (2x) and then 20 days (next unit).
Brexit is such a huge undertaking, effects so many areas of society and economy. To do it really properly should take much, much longer than 3 years.

@HelmutJ
But first the PM needs to hold a speech and tell the direction, than Whitehall can start preparing things. To cancel that speech is a bit more telling than Junckers cancelling Davos for the reason of illness.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:10 AM CET

HelmutJ

@Just an EU guy

It would make sense for both, the UK and the EU.
But the UK people I work with would want shorter as possible.
They seem to think EU is prevaricating as a tactic and resent it.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:11 AM CET

Ian

Elena adaal ,
Norway a country with a population smaller than Scotland , made their deal with the EU , and it is up to them to renegotiate it , if they choose .

Elena , make up your mind

Is Britain a full member of the EU , during the transition , in which it has to abide by EU rules , membership fees , and is entitled to a say as all other full EU members .

Or is Britain no longer a member of the EU during transition , thus no membership fees , no EU rules apply , and no say on EU matters .

You seem to ignore that the transition would be for both UK and EU businesses to adjust to the new relationship .

This is to limit damages caused to both The UK and EU member countries businesses .

It is a two way street

Remember , The EU and its MEPs will be held responsible in ALL remaining member countries , if the member countries businesses suffer major losses , because the EU refused to negotiate a fair deal , and the UK goes straight to WTO .

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:23 AM CET

Kenny

@Priscilla du Bleu
“It’s just the usual brexit troll ‘strategy’ to pick german first names for presenting their bull*hit as alleged German opinion on brexit :-D.”

Like German boys pretending to be half British girls and calling themselves ‘Priscilla’ ?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:27 AM CET

tpk

@Ian

Seems to me that you really have not understood what UK is asking for. Hammond came up with the idea of a transition in September. UK is explicitly asking for staying in SM and CU. It knows that this is only possible by accepting FoM and ECJ. That is why Davis is accepting this now. You are accepting FoM and ECJ by free will!!!

If you decide to go for Canada afterwards you can of course do this, but this will be a clear cut in x years, not a gradual transition towards that. Transition phase is a phase where nothing changes. Hammond especially wanted this so economy has not adapt for changes 2 times.

So what you get in transition is exactly what you get now. You are a full member of EU, just not involved in politics anymore. Full access to everything. That’s why the price is the same as ever. Perhaps a little rebate would be fair but I can not judge this.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:32 AM CET

Tabulazero

Trust ? Sorry but why should the EU trust a country who one day says it has agreed to regulatory alignment in order to move the negotiations to the next step and then the next says that the said agreement is not worth the paper it is written on ?

One may wonder if the UK government negotiated the first agreement in good faith.

The UK is leaving. It is not getting a say in what is going on in the EU anymore.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:35 AM CET

Leroy

@Peter G
Source: The Express.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Idiot.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:48 AM CET

Saintixe

To my knowledge Canada is not geographically a part of Europe and it is a trade deal with the EU.
UK is a member of the EU. Rather was a member. Norway is not a member.
Canada has not voted Brexit. Norway has not cancelled its treaties with the EU.
Any claim Britain should benefit during the transition on agreements made between EU and Canada or Norway is lunacy.
Apples and pears may be fruit but not the same fruit.
This transition will probably slowly moved from 100% compliance to serious divergence.
After all this is Britain aim. Hence the use by London of the word implementation. Which means putting things in accordance to plans.
EU has no responsibility in these implement plans. But should Britain try steer away without proper agreements from Brussels (soft sound of cherries being picked) Brussels will act accordingly.

In short Helmut, Britain made its bed. Not Brussels. Britain will have to sleep in it. Not Brussels.
This is what grownups do.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:06 AM CET

Ian

tpk ,
I understand fully what has been asked for .
Under transition , everything stays the same , but that should also include the rights of UK MEPs in the European Parliament , to vote for or against EU proposals .

It is the EU that wants to remove the UK MEPs rights to vote on EU matters , thus during transition the UK is not the same as other members , but is still expected to abide by the proposals implementation , EU rules and pay full membership contribution .

Tabulazero ,
“Trust ? Sorry but why should the EU trust a country who one day says it has agreed to regulatory alignment in order to move the negotiations to the next step and then the next says that the said agreement is not worth the paper it is written on ?

One may wonder if the UK government negotiated the first agreement in good faith.

The UK is leaving. It is not getting a say in what is going on in the EU anymore.”

The UK had always said that the phase 1 negotiation agreements were with conditions .

It would have been irresponsible to agree to pay huge sums of money etc , whilst the EU refused to discuss the future trade relationship between the UK and EU member countries .

So the agreements were on the basis of an amicable trade agreement being secured in future negotiations .

EU rules ” nothing is agreed , until everything is agreed ”

a trade deal has not been agreed yet , so Mr Davis was right

If the EU refuse to negotiate an acceptable trade agreement , then the phase 1 agreements are void ( EU rules)

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:06 AM CET

just an EU guy

Ian

Be realistic. By definition, UK will not be a member during transition after march 2019 . Non-members cannot vote. It is not something that can be changed to accommodate UK.

EU may accept (or not) to consult UK on new EU laws, during transition period. But it does not mean that we will have to listen. Especially since those laws may actually apply after UK will have left.

I understand that you are not happy with the idea of paying and having no vote, but this is not EU problem. This is very much the result of the strategy of your government. Your government chose the timing of article 50. In December joint report, your government agreed to “contribute to, and participate in, the implementation of the Union annual budgets for the years 2019 and 2020”. Your government requested a transition.

Anyway if UK government is not satisfied with transitional agreement and prefers to aim for the door in march 2019, it is still possible.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:07 AM CET

Ian

Pdb ,
“The EU parliament still can veto anything they do not approve, and the MEPs are representatives of … drumroll please …. the member states!”

And the citizens ( the ones that will suffer from their own governments (MEPs) actions) , will of course hold their … drum roll , own governments responsible .

Just as the German elections have shown that German citizens hold Merkel responsible for her open door policy

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:21 AM CET

JPM

This is surely the longest argument about nothing.

If it is, in fact, a transition, then things should be open to change, lower contributions, no new EU regulations except where trading with the EU, no membership of the Common Fisheries Area, no say in law making, no membership of the Common Agricultural Policy etc. Many things would, however, stay the same, Euratom, European Medicines Agency, Europol. Ideally those that remain the same should be there that the EU and UK agree to continue with in an ongoing basis in future.

If it’s not a transition but an extension of the status quo then Article 50 should be extended and things should remain as they are currently.

If this is too difficult politically for the EU or the UK then the UK should leave without a deal at the end of the Article 50 process in March 2019.

Simples.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:26 AM CET

Ian

just an EU guy ,
Thank you for your well reasoned response

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:26 AM CET

tpkl

@Ian
UK MEPs.

Well, think this through. If UK could still block decisions and have influence here and there. UK would for not sure not use this as leverage in negotiations? If you don’t give us this and that, we will block …? Come on.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:28 AM CET

French Expat

You will get no say. You will be exactly like Norway. Only EU members have a say. During the transition period, you will be outside the EU and not a member.
Do you want a translation deal or not ?. You are free to go away without one. The transition deal will be on our terms. You can take it or leave.
You are not in a position to ask for anything. You will accept what we give you or go away.
When someone joins the EU they join on our terms and when they leave, they also leave on our terms.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:31 AM CET

François P

The article misses the most important point. This speech by David Davis is the first one which is not entirely delusional. He might not get everything he asks for, but his demands are not unreasonable.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:33 AM CET

tpk

@JPM

If it’s not a transition but an extension of the status quo then Article 50 should be extended and things should remain as they are currently.

Well, it’s the extension. But it is your Brexiteer Davis asking EU for it, not the other way round. And I am sure they weighed their opportunities and did not find any other possibility.

A transition in the sense of a gradual change would cause complete chaos for everbody. That would be Monty Phyton at the Customs.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:35 AM CET

tpk

@François P

Great point actually! First time a member of the Cabinet speaks in technical language in the public. And as soon as they do this the differences between EU and UK get manageble. EU taking UKs wishes into account is not completely out of the way but just reasonable.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:40 AM CET

Bri

@tpk
@François P

The British government has never said anything different. UKIP has but they are not government.
At last you hear and seem to understand what is being said.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:46 AM CET

Peter2

Transition period is the only possible solution to this Mess.
I would rather have UK having a vote, but are we able to trust the Brits to vote in the best interest of EU27. There will be changes coming that will last longer than Uk’s Transition period. So why should UK have a say in these matters ?

Second issue is of course Farage. Just when one thought he would be enlightening UK politics for coming years. The thought for having him as a MEP for two more years, just isn’t appealing.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 12:04 PM CET

Tabulazero

@ Ian: but the regulatory alignment is quite peculiar in the sense that it would apply in the case that no trade agreement is achieved.

It was taken as a firm commitment by the ROI, Brussels and the rest of Europe. To come at a latter stage and say that is actually a conditional agreement raise questions as to wether the UK negotiated in good faith.

Of course, the UK always has the opportunity to stop the talks and disregard this agreement but this would not be without consequences for its credibility.

As for DD latest idea, I am very afraid this is a clever ploy to keep a foot in the door post transition. If the EU agrees to this scheme, you can bet that the Brits will push very hard to morph this thing into a more permanent feature. After all, wouldn’t it be nice for the UK to continue to have a say and some influence in what happens to be its biggest export market ?

I would consider this as unacceptable from the EU perspective. You want to have a say ? Become a member with all the bells and whistles this implies.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 12:05 PM CET

Priscilla du Bleu

Posted on 1/27/18 | 12:07 PM CET

XKM

@Ian,
@Saintixe, etc.

Is Norway an EU country? No! Does it have to contribute to the EU budget & follow EU rules and regulations without having a say? Yes!

Next question: Does the sun shine out of the UKs a…? No! (although brexitears would have you believe it).

Is Switzerland an EU country? No! Does it have to contribute to the EU budget & follow EU rules and regulations without having a say? Yes!

still the sun doesnt shine from where the brexitears believe.

so, basically to put in words that you understand “brexit means brexit” 🙂

Posted on 1/27/18 | 12:29 PM CET

Vishnou

“Demanding” rather than “requesting” is not the best way of encouraging a fruitful dialogue.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 12:51 PM CET

tpk

@Bri

“The British government has never said anything different. UKIP has but they are not government.”

Row of the summer
We owe nothing
Missing bill
EU can go whistle
EU wants to punish
No border in Ireland and full control over Regulations …

That wasn’t UKIP, that was all official stuff. I remember being upset when I read that the same phrases being used in this forum here were repeated up and down by leave MPs in parliament.

Of course May will have spoken very differently in Brussels, but she did not even try to stop all that nonsense being said in public.
As soon as the whole of UK starts getting down on a technical level the differences between EU and UK will get very, very minor. In the moment and much more in the past this is/was a fight between technical possibilities and the illusions of what Brexiteers thought must be easily possible.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 12:59 PM CET

Elena adaal

@Ian

“Norway smaller than Scotland”? Not really; Norway is part of one of the biggest trading blocks in the world (the EU). Five times bigger than the UK.

It will hurt the EU also – a bit – if there is no transition deal, but it would hurt more if we treat our friends and allies (Norway, Switzerland) worse than you.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 1:37 PM CET

TY

@Milton38 … It may seem an odd situation but remember the government campaigned to remain. And the major force for leave UKIP (the same UKIP that won the highest party vote in the european elections) were neither in power before or after the referendum. Both the Labour and conservative parties are split in remain/leave. so it is true that no party in power planned for or expected the leave vote. So if it looks like they are working it through in real time to get the best outcome…that is because they are….it does not change the fat that it was a democratic decision. and it does not make the decision to leave wrong.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 1:52 PM CET

Saintixe

Demands…

A lot of demands by people who have not bothered to read actually the exact wording of treaties.

Same people have engaged their country into dates of application of political votes without bothering to notice chosen dates may be tricky if planned too early.

Now having to beg… sorry… demand the other side to be kind enough to give more time to transition… sorry, implement. 2 years, no , sorry, three years.

Same people looking forward to negotiate on their own with the rest of the world who is watching the whole thing unravel.

Demands… Meanwhile feeling really sorry for themselves because some realize the negotiations are going pear shaped and mentioning becoming vassals.

Who voted Leave?
Who chose the date of March 2019?
Who chose its team of negotiators?
Who is unable to provide proper homework on the consequences of Brexit on its own people and industries?
Who is unable to provide more clues to what actually means deep and special in this new relationship to the EU?
Personally, I have a deep and special relationship to my dog. I doubt we are speaking of the same thing.
All the above is uniquely under the watch of Britain. This is not under Brussels.
London is totally responsible for this mess.

It is not the job of Barnier to decide for Britain what Britain wants. Though I can understand why he is no sorely tempted to throw Britain along of the bath water…

Posted on 1/27/18 | 2:25 PM CET

Peter G

So first you beg for a transition that Britain desperately needs but the EU doesn’t. And then you demand the right to make the rules. By golly I expect before long Britain will be demanding the EU be declared their new empire. I guess what the Rhesus Monkey said must have scared Davis.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 2:46 PM CET

Ian

tpk , Sorry for the slow response , I am a busy man .

“Well, think this through. If UK could still block decisions and have influence here and there. UK would for not sure not use this as leverage in negotiations? If you don’t give us this and that, we will block …? Come on.”

Exactly , but you do not see this in the EUs approach , that the commission will try to put through proposals that would be detrimental to Britains interests , while Britain would have no say , and be obligated to abide by during the transition .

Posted on 1/27/18 | 3:32 PM CET

John C. Ojones

“…but it has not given up asking for something in return — a voice at the EU table.”
Nobody expects too much from a brexitard like Davis…
But it seems he is the epitome of imbecility.
How the f*c#k can the UK have a voice at the EU table when they dont belong to the EU anymore??
They are just a third country.
A third insignificant country, we can add.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 3:45 PM CET

Peter G

That is exactly right Ian. Very likely the EU would make decisions deleterious to British interests during the transition since they need no longer take those particular interests into consideration. But then the whole point of Brexit is so Britain does not have to take any European interests into account and can act solely in their own self interest. Britain wanted out. That means out.

Did you hear about the patient who went to his doctor for his test results. The doctor told him he had Aids, cancer and the plague. Gosh, said the patient, what treatment do you recommend? Mud baths, said the doctor. That will help? Said the patient doubtfully. No said the doctor, but at least you’ll get used to lying in dirt.

Might as well get used to not having a say now.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 4:45 PM CET

Priscilla G OJones

@Peter G

Buggar oorf ya we lardy bottomed german girly. Ya fool none.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 5:15 PM CET

oden schutz

Of course the Britties can have their say! They can whinge all day and all of the night! And we don’t have to listen!

Posted on 1/27/18 | 5:30 PM CET

Dan

@tpk
“Norway pays more per capita (right word?, per person) than you do.”

Contributions aren’t calculated per capita, or are they?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 5:50 PM CET

Dan

@Peter G
“So first you beg for a transition that Britain desperately needs but the EU doesn’t. And then you demand the right to make the rules. By golly I expect before long Britain will be demanding the EU be declared their new empire. I guess what the Rhesus Monkey said must have scared Davis.”

Aren’t you Canadian? I demand to know why do you care?

Posted on 1/27/18 | 5:54 PM CET

Dan

The funny thing about all this demand nonsense is that in English demand is a very strong word, it always grates a little that the EU demand this and that because it is very confrontational wording. I guess Politico loves to chuck a word or two to get the blood running in its readers. You don’t seem to mind so much when the demand is the other way. 😉

Posted on 1/27/18 | 5:58 PM CET

Tabulazero

@oden schutz

But you do listen…. 🙂

Posted on 1/27/18 | 6:18 PM CET

oden shutz

I saw this live and no where did he use the word ‘demand’….

Posted on 1/27/18 | 6:30 PM CET

Antoine

The UK and the EU negotiated in good faith the separation fee. And UK agreed to pay the rest of the 2014-2020 budget and other things. Fair enough. Done.
This needs to be put in legal form. To be done.
Once this is done, EU will consider UK request for a transition. In order to be efficient, EU and UK already discussed the terms of a transition so that , if and when stage 1 has been completed and put in legal form, no time is lost to agree a transition.
Moreover, both parties have requested that some form of agreement between the parties about the future relationship need to be agreed before UK and EU enter a transition deal end March 2019 (EU offered several options, UK has just said it wants a CETA+++, a word without any spelled out content as far as the public is aware)
UK, EU, US…, all global Businesses requested that any transition should not require them to have to adapt first to a transition and second to a new relationship. D Davies (and EU) thinks Businesses requests are legitimate, hence has agreed to no change during transition.
In a transition, UK will not be a member, so will not have anymore MEPs, etc… and rights to have a say. (no problem, it takes more than 21 months to pass law in the EU given Nations need to approve)
So, people can argue as much as they want about transition terms but this is a loss of time.
Best is to progress as agreed by EU and UK
– Complete stage 1
– Look at the future relationship. This requires the Tory government defines a detailed practical position (good luck!) preferably compatible with existing terms governing relationships between countries and EU. Given importance of UK and EU existing relationship, some twicking at the margins can be considered and negotiated.
– Requests affecting existing trade deals and relationships with third parties make everything more difficult
If Rees Mogg who accepted the process many months ago now changes his mind, then, he and his friends can fire the government… and go for elections.

The only problem is the divided Tory party. It takes 2 to tango.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 6:56 PM CET

Peter G

Demand away Dan. The truth is that I don’t care any great amount. Anymore, so to speak, than I do about people who earn themselves Darwin awards. The means by which they earn their citations are the frequently quite entertaining and reflect those famous last words, hey everybody, watch this!

Now Dan may we presume that even if Davis did use the word demand we may rely on his quote about undermining each other? Which he would prefer the EU never do, and that Britain be allowed extra time to prepare to do. Once again we are back to the whole point of Brexit aren’t we? Britain wishes to compete alone on its own merits without the burden of the EU. And to craft their own laws to their own advantage. Why should the EU be different? And how is it possible for any divergence to take place that does not conflict? That would be impossible.

Essentially Britain is asking for an opportunity to date and look for new mistresses while getting a divorce and while living in the marital home. Naturally they are expected to contribute to the costs of maintaining that home. But if they expect to decide who and what their soon to be ex-spouse can do while the divorce is in progress they are likely to be disappointed. They will be told to get out and find their own place. Just like the real world.

Maybe Davis can pull this off but I doubt it. This after all the same guy who thought there was some market ten times as big as the EU with which Britain could easily make trade block deals. I think he meant Nobiru. Maybe Nemesis. Either way it’s not on this planet.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 7:20 PM CET

Ian

It seems those who post on here , do not acknowledge that a transition period is not a request by UK citizens , but by the UK government for businesses like BMW UK (foreign owned) etc , and British owned companies, to continue operating with minimal disruption .

Fair enough , The EU doesn’t want to negotiate amicably , and wants to dictate everything .
Lets wait until The UK government has no option but to walk away from the table , and let all European citizens and companies see who loses the most .

Personally , WTO is fine for me

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:20 PM CET

Tabulazero

Frankly, given how long it takes for the EU to agree on a Directive and how long it takes for member states to apply those Directives, DD argument is pretty weak.

So why is he making it ?

Because you can bet that what he is proposing is the first stepping stone toward continued British involvement in EU affairs post Brexit.

The UK has decided to leave the table which is its choice. It has to own up to the fact that his will mean a reduced influence on European affairs.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 8:42 PM CET

Joke

Some might not have noticed : Ms. May is not Ms. tacher; and the EEC is not the .eu

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:23 PM CET

Priscilla G Ojones

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:32 PM CET

tucked forelock

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:43 PM CET

Milton38

@Ian
Strange logic, British perhaps?
Was it the EU that voted to oust the UK or did the UK vote to leave?
Was Cameron forced by the EU to hold a referendum?
Try to wake up to the fact that you were led by the nose, like an ox to slaughter, by the likes of BJ and NF, you were unable to distinguish between fact and fantasy. A sure sign of the onset of delusions.

WTO would be fine for the UK but WTO would be a disaster for the EU…..

Posted on 1/27/18 | 9:51 PM CET

tpk

@Ian

“Exactly , but you do not see this in the EUs approach , that the commission will try to put through proposals that would be detrimental to Britains interests , while Britain would have no say , and be obligated to abide by during the transition .”

If you’d only stay 2 years in EU, what bad can really happen to you if you are not in ‘control’ anymore? ECJ is about regulations for economy, and it’s the economy who wants to stay. They are ‘taking the risk’ happily. The normal people won’t notice at all as it does not touch their life. And if their is a real potential danger to UK, EU could agree on some conditions with UK before entering the transition. Anyway I suppose UK and EU officials get on much better than we do here in the forum.

“It seems those who post on here , do not acknowledge that a transition period is not a request by UK citizens , but by the UK government for businesses like BMW UK (foreign owned) etc , and British owned companies, to continue operating with minimal disruption .

Fair enough , The EU doesn’t want to negotiate amicably”

What do you suggest? That EU ignores May and Hammond and only talks to true Brexiteers? You are so used to blame EU for everthing that you even take EU responsible that your PM is not listening to you Brexiteers? To convince your PM to do the “right thing” is your job, not EUs.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 10:10 PM CET

Shelagh

We will be leaving the customs union and the single market in 2019, said Theresa May. That’s a promise.

Any agreement with the EU must “allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services”, Mrs May said.
“But I want to be clear: what I am proposing cannot mean membership of the single market.
“It would, to all intents and purposes, mean not leaving the EU at all.
“That is why both sides in the referendum campaign made it clear that a vote to leave the EU would be a vote to leave the single market.”

“We are leaving the customs union and single market. I’ll write it on a sign.”

“How many times do I have to say it?” she asks. Well, at least once more, and if she can’t then she should step down immediately. A prime minister who cannot keep to her word doesn’t deserve to keep her position.

Posted on 1/27/18 | 11:38 PM CET

Peter G

Oh I think I get the gist Ian. But if you think Britain requires an extended transition period because of their concern about foreign firms operating in Britain, I will disagree. Those are British workers, earning wages and paying taxes in Britain. That’s who they are concerned for and properly so. That’s who they should be concerned for. That’s why they need the extended transition period.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 12:02 AM CET

bluebell

@Anton
@HelmutJ
“The UK wouldn’t be paying a cent/penny more for the transition period. The financial settlement includes the 7 year budget running until December 31st. 2020. In a way you could say they are getting for their money than they initially bargained for.

As for giving them a say in future politics, that would serverly undermine the democratic process of the EU. If we grant the UK some kind of veto over rules or say over rules apart from the democratic influence everybody else has, then we’re are giving them an undemocratic influence.

As for FTAs, what if the UK decides to allow chlorinated chicken, hormone beef for phthalate filled plastics into the UK. During the transition period, there would be no way to stop them from entering the EU.”

Anton I do not think it is a question of a veto but access to an independent arbitration system which is a different thing entirely.

It is a question of both the UK and the EU devising a system for the transition and future post transition relationship with a sort of insurance policy for both parties to avoid being subject to the vagaries of political whim. Or to put it another way if the EU and UK wish to continue in a trading relationship there has to be a legal mechanism for such.

The transition period was actually first mentioned by the EU and the Brexiteers said “No way”. After a number of months when the extent of the legal and technical hurdles became apparent to the UK they said “Oh, OK”. The response from the EU was then “you have to formally ask for this transition period” which is what the UK did. One thing that the EU is very good at is administration (the technical bits).

Put very simply once the UK is out of the SM and CU there has to be a mechanism in place for trade to continue in order to prevent disruption to trade both ways and all the economic consequences that entails. This will take time to implement on both sides.The UK will need to establish agencies to facilitate this. The EU with somewhat less to do will still need time to set up border controls amongst other things.

All these technical and administrative issues need to be wrapped in a legal safety blanket but the EU by its own rules cannot do this before the UK has exited – March 2019 – hence the transition period provides time for both sides to thrash out the framework for a future relationship and prevent a legal limbo and said disruption causing loss of trade.

I have no wish to make you eyes glaze over so I have kept it as brief as I can so please do not come back to me later and say “But you did not mention so and so”

So, in conclusion, I would say nothing is simple and straightforward and there is much of which we are unaware and all the political rhetoric does nothing to clarify matters.

As to your chlorinated chickens and hormone fed beef etc.
Are you aware that last year 280,000 tonnes of chicken were imported into the EU from Brazil and Vietnam. 40,000 of which came to the UK. I believe these were for use in processed chicken products.

For what it is worth by way of reassurance I think there has been a decision taken by the UK for policy in that area (and others) to push for higher standards. I believe it has become apparent that we could not possibly compete in the global economy with countries who are able offer cheap produce due to economies of scale so the only alternative is to go the other way and gain a reputation for premium products and hopefully prices too.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 2:06 AM CET

Shelagh

@Ian and @Peter G It isn’t British industry’s interests that are being protected; it’s the financial sevices sector. In order to continue trading, the financial sector has to keep the “passporting” rights. The benefits to the super rich are enormous, but the money stays in the pockets of the financiers, and does not benefit the rest of the country. Those who work in the services sector have scant regard for the prosperity of the country; they only want to protect their personal wealth. The GDP growth over the last ten years has not prevented the decline of the NHS to the point of almost collapsing. We are treated with utter disdain, and accused of being stupid. The country would perform much better if it relied less on the financial sector, and instead built up manufacturing, agriculture, fishing and industry.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 2:16 AM CET

trisul

“David Davis demands UK say on EU rules during Brexit transition”

Good joke, Brexit transition is a privilege, not a right.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 10:07 AM CET

Perfidious Albino

@Priscilla du Bleu

Give it up. Your continual trolling is an embarrassment.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 1:32 PM CET

Cheese eating surrender monkey.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 1:35 PM CET

JPM

@Bluebell

The EU’s objection to chlorine washed food is not technical, it accepts that it is safe and present no threat to human health, it’s simply another non-tarriff barrier to trade designed to protect inefficient local producers…. And the scam goes on!

“In parallel, RESFOOD’s partners are testing a peroxyacetic, acid-based sanitiser and chlorine dioxide as alternatives to the chlorine wash widely used as a disinfectant. Industry faces increasing pressure to find alternatives to chlorine – which is currently banned as a wash for produce in some European countries, including Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Belgium.”

bluebell

As stated in an earlier post I do not think it is a question of a veto but access to an independent arbitration system which is a different thing entirely.

For those of you who can be fagged to read it I have posted a link to the EFTA/EU arrangement formally referred to as The EEA Judicial System and the Supreme Courts of the EFTA States. “http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/3/2/2043.pdf” I imagine it was this sort of arrangement D. Davis was referencing.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 2:17 PM CET

bluebell

@French Expat
“You will get no say. You will be exactly like Norway. Only EU members have a say. During the transition period, you will be outside the EU and not a member.
Do you want a translation deal or not ?. You are free to go away without one. The transition deal will be on our terms. You can take it or leave.
You are not in a position to ask for anything. You will accept what we give you or go away.
When someone joins the EU they join on our terms and when they leave, they also leave on our terms.”

When you say “When someone joins the EU they join on our terms and when they leave, they also leave on our terms.” is correct. It does not in fact apply to what is termed the “transitional/implementation period” (which is in effect another way to extend the timeline of Article 50 notice period to enable a deal to be thrashed out for a future relationship without having to have all member states agree to this).

Howover, although it allows both parties more time to negotiate, the terms are not exactly the same as they are within the Article 50 notice period as it also has elements of FTA discussions.

I also found your reference to Norway both unnecessarily dismissive and naive. Norway in fact is rather influential in global rule setting (which is above the EU’s head) and in fact the EU has to adopt a number of global rules which Norway has helped shape.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 3:03 PM CET

Go Home?

@French Expat

You are not being held for ransom. If you don’t like it here (where you have no vote and you get no say) you can always pack your bags and go home. But you might not find it so easy to find a job ! 🙂

Posted on 1/28/18 | 4:07 PM CET

Junckers prescription

Posted on 1/28/18 | 4:09 PM CET

Lost in translation

Its swine flu ! too much German pork ?

Posted on 1/28/18 | 4:11 PM CET

Lost in translation

@wow – fake

Hello Priscilla

Posted on 1/28/18 | 4:12 PM CET

HelmutJ

@bluebell

The Americas don’t have chlorinated chicken any longer, that went out decades ago.
Although perfectly safe there are other better methods.
That was an EU ruse to spread fear of trading with the US.
It looks like the UK is seeking a CETA+++ agreement but with WTO tariffs and quota restrictions on EU agricultural products. The UK wants the financial services to be included and is prepared (to balance the books) to add more products to the WTO tariffs and quota system should this be restricted.
It looks like the UK is asking for BOTH a fair and a balanced trade deal.
If it goes CETA+++ way, little transition would be required and the tariffs and quotas could be brought online in a timescale as the UK / EU see’s (and agrees) fit.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 6:36 PM CET

bluebell

@JPM
Thank you for that.

I have long thought hydroponics had great potential in combatting problems feeding an ever increasing global population with dwindling resources.

Have you seen the work being done with plant response to using different parts of the light spectrum? It appears to have the potential not only to increase the speed of plant development but also the size of the fruiting crop – potentially allowing more harvests per annum.

I am aware that NTBs have become an increasing part of trade much to the annoyance of Australians who would like to see them scrapped altogether.

It is particularly vexing that EU rule setting appears to have succumbed to pressure from lobbyists for interested parties (with large purses) rather than for best practice.

It is not the scientists who create our problems but the uses their knowledge is put to by big business and governments.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 6:49 PM CET

Chrispy

No taxation without representation.

Posted on 1/28/18 | 11:00 PM CET

HelmutJ

@Priscilla du Bleu

I promote nothing, I’m not British.

Posted on 1/29/18 | 9:26 AM CET

HelmutJ

Having said that, I enjoy living and working in Britain.
As a German ex-pat I’d like to remain here and continue to earn a good living.
A fair deal for the UK would help me achieve my desires for myself, my family, and my children (who like you have dual nationality).